[2 Dismissal] For the next staff meeting: Head of Staff Expectations

Recommended Posts

Basically, a list of expectations that are very clear of what staff expect from head of staff whitelistees (lore can follow suit with races if they like the idea too?). Right now, we have an application and once the person is accepted they're dropped in the deep end and able to play as the ultimate authority captain and meant-to-be extremely knowledged IAAs. The problem is, I've seen a lot of Heads of Staffs that no nothing about tau ceti lore, are missing large portions of regulations that they should understand clearly and other such problems.

Admins/Mods will frequently tell Head of Staff players if punished that more is expected from our whitelisted community members, but there is not a clear outline outside of the application of what is precisely required of us on an OOC and even IC level.

If the staff could provide a clear outline of the expectations heads of staff will be held to (and which breaching could see their whitelist revoked), I think it would improve our current body of whitelisted players.

Those are just a minor example, I'm more focused on OOC issues with head of staff quality.

I find IRs to be long and drawn out and lead to little if any punishment which I am not often even told of what happened in the end to them unless it was a demotion of a singular character or higher action than that (when my HoS character was suspended, I was told I could make another HoS character and play the role still).

Regulations such as uniform policies, the authority of internal affairs (I've had a few heads of staff try to correct my IAA on things and they end up being wrong, it's embarrassing, this includes me asking an employee to review their PDA messages to investigate a complaint about THEIR PDA MESSAGES and a CMO telling me I shouldn't be violating crew privacy for my investigation).

Heads of Staff should know any lore that affects in game situations. They should know there's been what, two canon pirate attacks on the first NSS Aurora, they should know it's illegal to leave NanoTrasen's employment and get hired by another interstellar company, they should probably know our current President's name and the name of our Chief Executive Officer (some seriously haven't known who Miranda Trasen is)

Share this post

Link to post

but there is not a clear outline outside of the application of what is precisely required of us on an OOC and even IC level.

You may wish to refer back to your own whitelist application, in the event that somehow a large gap of time has changed your perception what is expected of whitelistees. You had to do more than just something right to get it accepted. Players who typically establish a reputation of troublemaking tend to have their whitelist requests denied due to short/long-standing issues with following the rules and being very uninteresting in regards to in-character execution.

Right now, we have an application and once the person is accepted they're dropped in the deep end and able to play as the ultimate authority captain and meant-to-be extremely knowledged IAAs.

Easy to acquire, easy to be denied and also easy to lose the whitelist once it's gotten. People are expected to have an idea of what they're getting into, it would not be wise for someone to apply for command whitelists if they weren't ready for it, as has happened numerous times.

The problem is, I've seen a lot of Heads of Staffs that no nothing about tau ceti lore, are missing large portions of regulations that they should understand clearly and other such problems.

When asked to elaborate:

What Tau Ceti lore should command staff keep in mind?

Heads of Staff should know any lore that affects in game situations. They should know there's been what, two canon pirate attacks on the first NSS Aurora, they should know it's illegal to leave NanoTrasen's employment and get hired by another interstellar company, they should probably know our current President's name and the name of our Chief Executive Officer (some seriously haven't known who Miranda Trasen is)

Okay. I know very few people who don't know most of these details aside from the pirate attack thing. I guarantee anyone who didn't know all of the above was new or trolling.

If the staff could provide a clear outline of the expectations heads of staff will be held to (and which breaching could see their whitelist revoked), I think it would improve our current body of whitelisted players.

They're called the "Server Rules." Heads of staff do not need rules explicitly for themselves that will be enforced like it was brought down from an avenger of God. They are already required to be in-character at almost all times, they are required to not grief, or do anything in regards to abuse their power for a very inexcusable reason as a non-antagonist. And then there are even more rules which cover a broad spectrum of other situations.

Anything that does not explicitly violate the rules or the given spirit of them, is a moral grey area or an IC issue and should be treated as such.

Skull132 has a head of staff guide that is effectively a leadership 101 course in either the head of staff subforum (secret club) or the guides/tutorials section. His points are very insightful and they've personally driven me to try to be a better head of staff than what normally people expect command to strive for. They are not necessarily written law but they provide excellent pointers on how to save rounds from going completely to shit in a leadership capacity.

I find IRs to be long and drawn out and lead to little if any punishment which I am not often even told of what happened in the end to them unless it was a demotion of a singular character or higher action than that (when my HoS character was suspended, I was told I could make another HoS character and play the role still).

Congratulations, Xander. Making excuses for as to why you don't make incident reports makes you part of the problem.

Regulations such as uniform policies, the authority of internal affairs (I've had a few heads of staff try to correct my IAA on things and they end up being wrong, it's embarrassing, this includes me asking an employee to review their PDA messages to investigate a complaint about THEIR PDA MESSAGES and a CMO telling me I shouldn't be violating crew privacy for my investigation).

Did you, perchance, consider that these are various IC issues that should be reported to CCIAA, or did you just shell out enough incidents for justification to make a thread like this? Not to mention that stuff like enforcing uniform regulation applies to only the emergency departments where the jumpsuits are required for a professional look and for safety.

It's not "embarrassing" when someone is wrong, you do not need to stress the severity of people making mistakes or bad calls in judgement as much as you do. If someone other than you being wrong somehow "embarrasses" you, than you have quite the hubris to contend with. Different heads of staff have different perceptions of regulations and how they should be enforced, likewise for how department SOP goes. Different expectations, sometimes they say, do or think things incorrectly, it is what makes players and their characters human and real. Only cold robots don't make mistakes, Xander, and I sincerely doubt that you've never made a mistake or error in judgement before.

Share this post

Link to post

Pretty much all of what we expect can be reasonably deduced. Its rare that it even affects the judgement call on punishing someone. [mention]Coalf[/mention] Might be able to elaborate in greater detail but as far as i am concerned heads of staff are just expected to be a little "better" at the game. Both in role playing and in various department mechanics. A research director consistently leaking phoron everywhere or a chief engineer blowing up the engine every other round would be looked at a lot harsher for example.

Share this post

Link to post

Heads of Staff are expected to be knowledgable on majority of mechanics in their department or atleast enough to effectivelly supervise the actions of their underlings, by no means should they know every corner by memory but they're expected to know enough to sustain the station and department effectively.

Additionally it's expected that they have read the directives,proper procedures and laws/regulations, although it's not expected that they know all of them by heart.

In regards to "what they should know", I quote the application,

Have you read the Aurora wiki on the head roles and qualifications you plan on playing?

This should cover everything you are REQUIRED to know. If people arent following these or aren't knowledgable it's contradicting what they said on their application and if they aren't sure they can just type "Aurora Wiki heads of staff" on google as honestly not everyone can memorize these.

In regards to lore, I must admit we have never talked about this part of whitelist, but a lot of them seem like an opinion.

People don't HAVE to know the names of the president or Miranda, they should but it's not against regulations to not know the name of your boss or the president. They should know, but don't have to.

Again, people don't have to know about the two pirate attacks, simply because I don't think it's something in the syllabus of staff training. They should but again, don't have to.

Regarding the "Can't leave NT for another corporation," yes that is a gross and ugly hole in knowledge and you should ahelp that so we can inform them properly.

But the thing is, I haven't heard about any of this? Maybe it's because I just do not play on your timezone but we haven't received any complaints IC or OOC which makes it a bit questionable to be making entire policies instead of putting in the extra effort to educate the players or inform us of this happening if this is such a common occurance.

Share this post

Link to post

What do you think the OOC responsibilities of Whitelisted players are to other players, and how would you strive to uphold them?:

This is what I am talking about - it is clear (and made obvious in various situations) that staff have unspoken ideas on how Command staff should act, behave and present themselves, and this sometimes conflicts with an individual's view on how command, or their command character - should act.

One example is when Captains enter combat (without outright being required) . Some might view this as a leader charging into battle with their crew for the sake of their station (something that has happened many times throughout history), but staff do not support Captains entering or being near combat most of the time. In fact, I got a warning for being a room away from active combat as my Captain.

I at least, feel like I've been reprimanded for expectations held against me that are specific in staffs mind, but left for us to guess parts of in our applications and not get warned for during play.

Share this post

Link to post

They have a job and a certain obligation to the round just like everyone else. Drive the narrative, have fun. They simply have more sway to the flow of the round itself., hence the whitelist. There's really not much to it. The wiki pages for the jobs also outline things enough in my opinion. Some include both do's and do not's.

A Director should not be using what ever their dangerous experiment on hostiles when not needed, similar as a scientist should not charge out of his lab with a bag full of guns.

Voting for dismissal.

Share this post

Link to post

They have a job and a certain obligation to the round just like everyone else. Drive the narrative, have fun. They simply have more sway to the flow of the round itself., hence the whitelist. There's really not much to it. The wiki pages for the jobs also outline things enough in my opinion. Some include both do's and do not's.

A Director should not be using what ever their dangerous experiment on hostiles when not needed, similar as a scientist should not charge out of his lab with a bag full of guns.

Voting for dismissal.

'Common-sense' is bad form for forcing someone to adhere to something. Everyone has a different idea of what is proper for their character and such.

Share this post

Link to post

Yes, that is what makes every character/player distinct from one another. In spite of this, the concept of 'common sense' is still widely considered in this community as abiding to the server rules and the golden rule when it comes to an OOC standpoint. If this is somehow difficult to understand then please ask exactly what you do not get about this.

Share this post

Link to post

After discussing this with the whitelist team, we have decided that this suggestion is not really needed, we have decided already on what we expect from the whitelisted members, neither a discussion to define this is necessary. Anyone doing anything that you might think is bad can be already reported to the proper parties.